Like this:

Now that we are finished reading Infinite Jest (and I’m not playing beat the clock to get my blog posted) I have ample time to reflect upon the novel, what I think Wallace sought to accomplish, and consider my reactions to his opus.

I told Kim during the break last night that I have never felt more ambivalent about a literary work. There were times I read with rapt attention, the narrative seemed to flow effortlessly, and I couldn’t wait to find out what happens next. But there were also several excerpts where it was all I could do to reach that last sentence. I suspect I’m not alone. This quasi-schizoid experience has led me to think more deeply about authorial intent.

I believe DFW set out to concoct an esoteric narrative that would appeal to a wide variety of readers (which in itself seems like a paradox). His fictional text seems to encompass several genres, including self-help, religion, sports, war, film, mathematics, etc. Thematically, his topics are vast and varied, and in his novel we can find extensive discourse on parenthood, adultery, teen angst, depression, suicide, drug abuse, homelessness, animal cruelty, international politics, espionage, and entertainment. The list goes on and on. Perhaps the breadth and complexity works for those readers who want to be exposed to things they know very little about (vis-à-vis Eschaton).

Reading this novel has forced me to take stock in what I value in a narrative. For me, Wallace’s humor and human interest elements were the most compelling. Conversely, I found the technical jargon, the excessive use of acronyms and his seemingly gratuitous use of footnotes as detracting from the experience. I am still on the fence in regards to the use of carnivalesque as a form of social commentary.

Several people in class seemed miffed with the ending; I would have to say that I was not surprised (nor did I feel let down) when the novel ended on a rather abrupt note. Here is my take on it: the novel is supposed to be reflective of the varieties of human experience. Out in the BIG BAD WORLD we have a tenuous grip on reality (a man-made concept). Wallace’s lack of resolution echoes this existential uncertainty. When I think about the ultimate destinies of the characters in the novel, I liken it to people in my own past. We shared an experience once, we have drifted apart lo these long years, but I am left with an indelible memory. Maybe they even contributed to my growth as a person…

In the end, perhaps what matters most is our own interpretations of what happened in the novel. Bern is of the opinion that Hal was getting further from his sense of self and closer to an emotional breakdown as the narrative continues. I choose to believe the opposite. Remember, Hal is only 17, and although he is critical of the Inner Infant meeting, the fact of the matter is he drove like 50 ticks to attend an NA meeting. How could this not be an act of self love? I also believe that he was high while meeting with the college administrators (hence, the dry mouth) and that when he says “I’m in here,” it’s a reflection of his marijuana-induced annular thinking. Upon further consideration, his facial expressions were the involuntary “tells” of someone with deep-seeded pathology trying to break out of his solipsistic cage.

In my opinion, ambiguity is one of the hallmarks of great literature. On that score, Wallace is worthy of praise.

Advertisement